Failed cartridges

[2ndsojourn]

How 'bout the .303 Savage? When eyeballing it next to a 30-30 it looks the same. I was able to grab a couple boxes of factory reload ammo at a couple gun shows and I always have my eye out for more.

[Mike Irwin]

.303 Savage-chambered rifles enjoyed moderate popularity for 40 or so years, and the round was loaded commercially into the 1980s.

In my mind that qualifies it as an obsolete cartridge, but not a failed cartridge.

[Salmoneye]

.303 Savage is still available commercially...

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/produ...-rds?a=1584035

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/cate.../303-savage.do

[Guv]

But could we consider it failed when compared to it's direct competition, the 30-30 Winchester?
The 99 may have really been it's biggest problem concerning it's justification. This because Savage offered the much more powerful 300 Savage latter in the same gun.

[Mike Irwin]

".303 Savage is still available commercially..."

Not still.

Again.

It was completely out of production for the better part of 15 to 20 years before Graff's brought it back.

The .303 is a perfect example of an obsolete cartridge that springs back to life long after it seemed to go the way of the dodo bird.



"But could we consider it failed when compared to it's direct competition, the 30-30 Winchester?"

No. Savage made probably 100,000 rifles chambered for .303 Savage.

Yes, that pales in comparison to the number of .30-30 Winchesters (Savage also chambered the Winchester round) made, but it still can't be qualified as a failure.

It wasn't as popular as the .30-30, but then again the Savage 99 wasn't as popular as the Model 94, but with nearly 3 million 99s made over a nearly 100 year production run, you can't qualify it was a failure, either.

[Salmoneye]

The .303 Savage was never 'dead' or obsolete in the way that other cartridges such as the .35 S&W Auto is...

[shootbrownelk]

How about all the "New" offerings by Nosler? They have pretty well covered every popular caliber and are probably working on the unpopular ones now. I wonder when the release date is for the "New" .25 Nosler or the .22 Nosler. I predict a slow painful death for most of the Nosler cartridges. They're evidently trying to out-recoil Weatherby calibers.

[samsmix]

I ha e seen the .26 Nosler used to good effect, but I too am predicting they will go nowhere.

The truth is that we have reached the limits of the *commonly* available technology. There is only so much you can do using the same Low-explosive propellants, pushing the same bullets, through the same barrels. The shock wave of a smokeless powder explosion tops out at about 5500-6000 fps, and even with that we are running into chamber erosion and the limits of jacketed bullets. The ExTronex rounds failed, and caseless ties us forever to factory ammo. It leaves little room for true innovation in the way of accuracy, trajectory, and barrel life.

Barring the invention of a new barrel material which allows higher pressures to be employed without chamber erosion or flame cutting (high tensile strength ceramic barrel liners perhaps?), I think we have approached the limits of what is possible.

[SPEMack618]

I like Mike's list, but I thought the .351 WSL enjoyed a lot of popularity with the -1907 pattern rifles.

[Mike Irwin]

".35 S&W"

Good example. That cartridge failed massively and quickly.


"but I thought the .351 WSL enjoyed a lot of popularity with the -1907 pattern rifles."

Look at my list again. I listed the .35 WSL, not the .351.

The .32 and .35 were chambered in the earlier 1905 Winchester. Both cartridges were widely seen as being underpowered and wholly useless.

To address that, Winchester introduced the .351 in the Model 1907 in a longer case holding more powder. It became quite popular as a police rifle, and some were even used by the French in World War I.

The .32 and .35 were both dropped from production pretty quickly and ammunition was discontinued in the run up to World War I.

The .32 WSL was re-engineered somewhat in the lead-up to World War II and became the .30 US Carbine cartridge.

[Road_Clam]

If you look at the popular current caliber offerings it's almost impossible to argue in this day and age that there is a legitimate "gap" between calibers. We have weeded out the past odd calibers that are or were "an answer to a non-existent problem" Weather you hunt game or hunt X's there is a perfect caliber (or several) that will do it with precision, and current component availability.

[reynolds357]

I can go to the store today and buy:
17
20
22
24
25
26
27
28
30
32
33
35
37
40
41
45
50

There are even more that can be ordered.
There is no. Gap.

[RaySendero]

As a commercial sporting cartridge,
the .223 Remington was introduced in 1964.

Y'all spin this thread around a bit!

Since that 223 in 1964, Name/describe a newer cartridge
that has attained similar abundance and popularity?

Not restricted to US - World wide.

[FrankenMauser]

Reynolds357, you skipped 36, 43, and 47/48 calibers.

...Not to mention 51, 58, 60, 62, 66, 70, 73, and 78 calibers.

All of the above, plus your list, are available, on the shelf, within six miles of my home.


However...
Just looking at calibers isn't very useful. It would be very difficult to argue, for example, that there is no gap between 7mm Waters and .30-378 Weatherby; or between .22 LR and .243 Win; or between .480 Ruger and .50 BMG.

[reynolds357]

I need a gun store like that one close to my house.
Would definitely be special order around here.

[FrankenMauser]

It's a combination of Sportsman's Warehouse, two LGSs (reasonably well stocked), and a few gunsmiths or kitchen-table-FFLs that also sell ammo/components. And a reasonably small/compact city, of course.
(There are more options, but they're dirty, nasty FFLs that I don't think should be in business, and I refuse to patronize them -- actually reported two of them to the ATF for handing people a "cheat sheet" for 4473s and/or transferring firearms without documentation... )

You'll almost never catch me paying any of their prices. ...But it is available.


Addendum: I just consulted Google Maps. The furthest firearms/ammo/component retailer that I patronize is actually only 3.9 miles away.

[MarkCO]

How long do we have to wait to add the .22 Nosler?

I really like Nosler bullets, but someone has a screw loose.

[dahermit]

Has anyone mentioned the .256 that Ruger chambered in the single-shot "Hawkeye", I think it was called? While I am at it, the .22 Jet.

[ShootistPRS]

Here is one of my own designs that if introduced would be a failed cartridge. The .22 LR centerfire. It is a 25Auto case with the rim, base and web narrowed to the same dimensions as the rimfire and the case body sized to match. I made my own dies and did the trimming on my lathe. I made a few bullets to see if it would work and I got a load that duplicated high velocity loads (1250 fps). The only advantage it has over rimfire is that it is reloadable. It must be fired from a gun with a selectable firing pin like the Thompson Center Contender. I found it to be more accurate than most of the high velocity rimfire ammo from the same gun and it is slightly less expensive to reload than rimfire ammo is to buy. It is about as practical as a 600 Nitro Express derringer but it was a fun project and I get attention with it when I use it at the range. One young man wanted to try it in his 22 and explaining to him that it wouldn't work he still wanted to try. After it failed to fire twice I explained that his firing pin was hitting the rim and not the primer. He did finally understand the concept ... I think.

[TheFriendlyMarksman]

I'm still bitter about the 264 Winchester. It was a great cartridge, but the 7mm mag made it almost obsolete.

[Mike Irwin]

"Has anyone mentioned the .256 that Ruger chambered in the single-shot "Hawkeye", I think it was called? While I am at it, the .22 Jet."

Yes. The .256 Winchester Magnum.

Hung on for a number of years, was chambered in several rifles, as well, including a Marlin lever action.

More successful than the .22 Jet, but not great.

[Mike Irwin]

"As a commercial sporting cartridge,
the .223 Remington was introduced in 1964.

Y'all spin this thread around a bit!

Since that 223 in 1964, Name/describe a newer cartridge
that has attained similar abundance and popularity?"

The .223 gets something of an unfair boost as just as it was being introduced commercially it was being adopted as the standard US military round.

Off the top of my head the only cartridge that I can think of that has gained traction of the type the .223 did is the .40 S&W.

[MarkCO]

Mike, you might be right, but the .40 is currently on a decline while the .223Rem is still on a slight increase.

[Mike Irwin]

"Mike, you might be right, but the .40 is currently on a decline while the .223Rem is still on a slight increase."

Yeah, so?

That doesn't detract from the fact that it was rapidly popular and chambered by many manufacturers.

It's not a failed cartridge.

[MarkCO]

Really Mike? You are the one who went off topic talking about popular cartridges in a failed cartridge thread.